From: petusek
Message: 34157
Date: 2004-09-15
>>From: "petusek" <petusek@...>another
>>
>>From: "alex" <alxmoeller@...>
>>To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
>>Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 7:13 PM
>>Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Why borrow 'seven'? (was: IE >right & 10)
>>
>>
>> > Exu Yangi wrote:
>> > > As for being a taboo word, and hence borrowed >from elsewhere ---
>> > > usually taboo words find their replacements from >within the native
>> > > stock. Withness Japanese shi (death;four) being >replaced from
>> > > counting heirarchy.the
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > I never studied sinology but I have a colleague >which is chinesse and
>>she
>> > told me in chinesse the word for "death" is the same >as the word for
>>>"four"
>> > and that word is "s1". Appropiate phonetic to >Japanese "shi" and has
>> > same meaning.Is this a loan from Chiness in >Japanesse or bothdeveloped
>>fromYes, exactly.
>> > the same root?
>>
>>Well, I am no sinologist (nor a japanologist), either, but >I think that:
>>
>>1. Japanese is an Altaic language (belonging to the >"wider" Altaic
>>(super-)stock, whereas Turk., Mong. & Tung. form >the "core-Altaic"), and
>>Altaic languages are thought to belong to the Nostratic >macrophylum.
>>
>>2. Chinese belongs to the Sino-Tibetan family, which >is considered a
>>member of the Sino-Caucasic or Dene-Caucasic >macrophylum.
>>
>>3. We would have to compare the proto-language >forms to learn what the
>>Proto-Japanese (Altaic, Nostratic) & Proto-Sinetic >(Proto-Sino-Tibetan,
>>Dene-Caucasian) reconstructions might have looked like. By the way, what
>>was
>>the Old Japanese form of "shi", what was the Old Chinese form???
>>
>>4. Yes, the words could be both from a single "root", but, perhaps,
>>rather than any common "heritage", one of them was a loan. As far as I can
>>remember (but I may be wrong (but I have read things like that so many
>>times
>>(as far as I can remember, I should write, again :)))), there was a time
>>when Chinese had a certain influence on the Japanese culture and language
>>(e.g. Kanji and so on, 'right?), therefore it is quite probable that the
>>way
>>of borrowing was Chinese > Japanese, and not vice versa.
>>
>>I hope I have answered your question a little. If the word means "4" &
>>"death" in both languages, the word being a loan is, in my view, the only
>>posssibilitiiieeeyeah...
>>
>>Petusek
>>
>It is probably a loan from Chinese.
>
>one = Chinese erh = Japanese i(chi)
>two = chinese ni = japanese ni
>three = chinese sam = japanese san
>four = chinese shi = japanese shi
>five = chinese go = japanese go
>
>There are a HUGE number of chinese borrowing in Japanese (a bit like the
>situation with english and french).
> It would not a stretch to find bothDo you know or have you read when this huge borrowing took place?
>"four" and "death" are borrowed from the Chinese.